jakee

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    24,960

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by jakee

  1. jakee
    For not creating a contingency plan for an extended insurgency? Yes, it is. And for invading in the first place? Yes, it is. He and his administration created the narrative that everyone else followed. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  2. jakee
    Because it doesn't make sense? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  3. jakee
    Just why were the Brits there? I mean did our intelligence reports convince ya'll....or did your intelligence get it wrong to? Partly the second one* but mostly just a power play. Tony Blair wanted the UK to have a better seat at the big boys table and decided that being cheerleader number one was the best way of doing that. * We actually exported some woefully poor intelligence back over the pond to help convince your guys. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  4. jakee
    It's OK Turtle, we get it. Starting war = good, leaving war = bad. No exceptions Where in your black and white world does going back into war become acceptable? It's not mine... Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  5. jakee
    It's the logical extension... Ah, no. I see you're battling a short memory. When Bush invaded Iraq his administration had no plan for a long term occupation or for dealing with a long term insurgency. It is on the record that they simply assumed there wouldn't be a backlash, or that if there was it would be dealt with in months. That's why you think Bush was a dumb fuck. I know, thank you. But you've forgotten to praise my evaluation of the binding nature of the SOFA. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  6. jakee
    It's OK Turtle, we get it. Starting war = good, leaving war = bad. No exceptions Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  7. jakee
    OK, good. So you agree that Bush was a dumb fuck for not having a project plan to deal with a long term Iraqi insurgency. In the current case though, the SOFA was not just a plan or a timeline, it was a binding agreement between two nations. It was not simply Obama's call to keep going - without the agreement of the democratically elected government of Iraq ignoring the Bush SOFA would mean the US would have returned to being a hostile occupying force. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  8. jakee
    Um, maybe you should tell your friends that: Born Again Christian – The Meaning The term “born again Christian” is an often misunderstood. If we look to its original reference, we see that the meaning is not about a physical birth, but about receiving a spiritual renewal. Since the original sin in the garden by Adam (Genesis 3), all mankind is born in a corrupted state by inheritance. It is by that our soul needs to be reborn—made pure and righteous again—the way God created us to be. He provided the way for this to happen, but because God gave us free will, we have a choice to accept it or not. The baby doesn't need to sin. It's already corrupted. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  9. jakee
    Right... so it was a dumbfuck move to retreat from Iraq under Bush's pre-established timeline, but it wasn't a dumbfuck move for Bush to create that timeline? And on that note, how unbelievably moronic was it for Bush to believe that after invading Iraq there would be no insurgency to deal with at all? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  10. jakee
    It doesn't work both ways, it's a statement of increasing specificity. The Falklands were temporarily (during the occupation) a subset of Argentina. You could be in the Falklands and be in Argentina, you could not be in Buenos Aires, or any part of mainland Argentina, and be in the Falklands. You also could not be in Buenos Aires and be in a Falklands war zone. It's like saying covering the Rodney King riots in LA meant you were in the Gulf war. Yes. What he said was exactly like "I missed Moyers in the war zones of [the] Falkland conflict in Argentina". Which is no surprise, because O'Reilly was not in the war zones of the Falklands conflict. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  11. jakee
    You were going to call it Bodhi? (You pull!) Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  12. jakee
    Ok, hang on a minute, so what? I think it's perfectly fair that after one and a half terms of Obama's presidency that Giuliani, or indeed anyone, can change their mind about him from what they thought before he ever sat in the Oval office. You might disagree with what his new opinion is, but it's not hypocritical of him to have thought differently before. (In fact, I think it's one of the worst aspects of modern politics that no-one is allowed to change their mind. Why on earth do we demand that politicians be immune to new information? Isn't that the least admirable trait in a chief decision maker?) Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  13. jakee
    Oh would you? Because it's clear that when he says "in the Falklands" he means "In Buenos Aires"? Like when he said "I've reported on the ground in active war zones from El Salvador to the Falklands" or "I've covered wars, okay? I've been there. The Falklands" or "I missed Moyers in the war zones of [the] Falkland conflict in Argentina" The only way he could have been in a Falklands war zone is if he was on the islands, on a ship in the exclusion zone, or on board HMS Conqueror when it sank the Belgrano. If being in a Buenos Aires riot makes you part of a Falklands war zone then so would being in Yorkshire. O'Reilly's comments are at best deliberately disingenous self-aggrandisement and at worst outright lies. You can argue the toss on whether it matters, but arguing that he never said it is blind partisan hackery. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  14. jakee
    You recall incorrectly. Heck, why are you relying on recall at all? You could just watch it again. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  15. jakee
    Except he has. The Mother Jones link has an embedded video of him saying it. I don't know why, from his perspective, he wouldn't just say "I'm sorry, I misspoke"? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  16. jakee
    Then how does one become a 'hardcore' heathen? Surely that would mean the switch is either on, off, or really off? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  17. jakee
    How was O'Reilly's past twisted? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  18. jakee
    So, to you, someone who believes in God and follows the teaching of Jesus but isn't born again is a hardcore heathen? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  19. jakee
    The only hard evidence that o'reilly has is that he was in Buenos Aires during the Falklands war, which is exactly what Mother Jones said. What Bill O'Reilly claims is that he never said he was on the Falkland Islands during the conflict - well, the quote from the article is "I was in a situation one time, in a war zone in Argentina, in the Falklands". Now if he said 'sorry, I misspoke, I meant during the Falklands conflict' then it's a storm in a teacup. But being O'Reilly he's probably not doing that. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  20. jakee
    Submit only has one 't'. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  21. jakee
    'Some' people would love just about any situation you can imagine. So what? Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  22. jakee
    That's beyond absurd. No you're not. And the crazy keeps on coming Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  23. jakee
    Ok, again, not being able to discriminate against groups of people does not mean having to serve them what they want. It's a separate issue. Let's say imagine some cafés. One decides not to serve Muslims. That's bad. Another serves Muslims but doesn't have halal food options. That's fine. Another has kosher options but no halal options. That's fine. They don't have to cater to every specialist requirement just because they cater to one. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  24. jakee
    No. It's not. Serving anyone is not the same as giving them anything they want. Again, the reasoning is all laid out in both the article from the OP and in several upthread exchanges. Unless you have a new disagreement with the reasoning in those posts then at this point you're just sticking your fingers in your ears going 'naa naa naa I can't hear you'. Do you want to have an ideagasm?
  25. jakee
    This was covered in the article that the OP posted. Then we went over it at the start of the thread. Then we went over it again. And then again. Has anything changed since then? Do you want to have an ideagasm?